Add your own rating

Only items marked with (*) are averaged
into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

*Temperament

(1=Awful,10=Excellent)

*Scholarship

(1=Awful,10=Excellent)

*Industriousness

(1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)

*Ability to Handle Complex Litigation

(1=Awful,10=Excellent)

*Punctuality

(1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)

*General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters

(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)

*General Ability as a Trial Judge

(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)

Flexibility In Scheduling

(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

*Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation

(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)

General Inclination Regarding Bail

(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)

Involvement in Plea Discussions

(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)

General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage

(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage

(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage

(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

*Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation

(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)

Involvement in Settlement Discussions

(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)

General Inclination

(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

What others have said about
Hon. Sabrina B. Kraus

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY6543
Rating:9.4
Comments:
An excellent jurist. I was a bit concerned when I saw her pro Landlord background, but she handled the holdover dispossess trial with aplomb and cut through the chaff to focus on the real issue. Very evenhanded. I could see the frustration on her face when someone deviated into extraneous territory. Constantly in her computer during the trial but that was a good thing as you can tell what she feels is important and emphasize that or ditch it depending on how it will affect the outcome. Overall a great trial experience and a great judge who is unafraid to rule fairly in a tough case.

Other

Comment #: NY5913
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She is s person that should not be sitting in housing court, I believe that she is showing bias against the community in favor of her husband who is working with development that he represent in her court. Ms. Kraus should go back into private practice with her husband since she rule in his favor in housing court. If there is anyway to remove this Judge everything in the people power should make that happen. Her contempt for Seniors and the working poor to the money developer should be looked into by her peers.

Litigant

Comment #: NY5201
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge presents herself as being very inexperienced and biased. She is pro-landlord, no matter what evidence is presented. She violated approximately nine laws as a judge during my case, and forced me to sign a lease that contained false information by promising eviction and telling me that I would lose the case, before reviewing any evidence. This judge is too familiar with landlord attorneys, and clearly needs to be removed from the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY4894
Rating:1.3
Comments:
This is my opinion: I agree with comment #NY4507. She can be quite nasty, and lots of her determinations are emotionally based -- heaven forbid if she takes a dislike to your client-tenant or doesn't feel sorry enough for them, they will lose their case. I don't know how she was appointed with her temperament. She is far from objective and unbiased, and does not belong on the bench.

Litigant

Comment #: NY4507
Rating:2.0
Comments:
Pro-landlord from what I've seen; she used to work for a landlord-focused firm, too. She's let landlords get away with fraud in court and refused to reconsider when significant proof of this was offered. If she takes a dislike to you she can be snide, snarky and even nasty, although I think she starts out trying to be even-handed. She can exhibit reactive sensitivity that arguments which might counter her perspective or ruling aren't just arguments; she allows herself to sometimes construe them personally or perhaps as rebellious--she appears to permit herself to see them as challenges against HER vs. simple challenges to her ruling; this seriously undermines her effectiveness, because she then resorts to unjust reactions and rulings.